good beginner astrophotography camera

[Some Dude With A Mak- Cass]

going to start getting into astrophotography soon, looking into good cameras. i have a $400 budget, a celestron sky prodigy 90 mak-cass, and no equipment that would affect which camera i get. thinking about the orion starshoot all-in-one, but not sure yet. remember, price is not a huge concern (i have a scholarship from my school for $1000 a year to spend on educational stuff, its how i got my telescope,) but i would like to keep it under $400 so i have some left for more lenses and some filters later on. the more help the better, thanks!!

[RT65CB-SWL]

Aloha Some Dude With A Mak- Cass and welcome to SGL. 

Q1. Are you looking at a DSLR or a dedicated camera?

Q2. How is your Sky Prodigy mounted? - ie Alt-Az, EQ...

Remember that catodioptric 'scopes have pros & cons. The pros are that they are lunar and planet killers for visual and short exposure photos. Also they require virtually no collimation. The cons are the focal ratios are nearing double figures. my ETX 105 is f14 and C6 is f10... also they have a narrow field of view. If yours is the same as the ones that I have just been looking at, then it is on an Alt-Az mount. This may/will cause star trails on long exposures, so you may at some point have to upgrade to an EQ mount which adds to the initial outlay and above your US$400 budget. It will also need to be polar aligned.

As for a DSLR many SGL'ers are using Canon models and some are Nikon or other. Canon used to be the benchmark, but Nikon and the others are catching up. Other SGL'ers will be along to offer their opinions.

If you decide/want to go for deep sky objects, then you may wish to consider a wide-field refractor...such as an ST80 (or clone) and an EQ mount eg EQ5 (or clone) and above.

Hope this helps.

[ronin]

For a dedicated camera then I suppose the ZWO ASI 178 is a good option, reasonabl size sensor, guess around the $500 mark but difficult to be sure.

Bigger sensor is the ZWO ASI 1600, also bigger cost again guess around the $1000 area.

Are you considering colour or mono ? Mono needs a filter wheel and filters and they like everything cost. Colour doesn't give as good a final result but they do not take as long to get the data/image as they collect everything in one go, hence the term OSC = One Shot Camera. Maybe a balance of the ASI 178 colour which is not as costly, but is colour however it will get you up, running and collecting images faster.

Your scope is not the best for imaging, people use Mak's on planets not DSO and long exposure imaging. The Mak is generally too slow for DSO imaging. Also as mentioned you need an equitorial mount (with motors/goto).

[AngryDonkey]

1 hour ago, ronin said:

Colour doesn't give as good a final result but they do not take as long to get the data/image as they collect everything in one go, hence the term OSC = One Shot Camera. Maybe a balance of the ASI 178 colour which is not as costly, but is colour however it will get you up, running and collecting images faster.

Just to add that shooting with a One Shot Color camera isn't necessarily faster than shooting with a mono camera and filters (some would even argue that it is slower) because the mono camera will gather the data for each color much quicker. However using an OSC camera is definitely more convenient, easier and also cheaper.

Having said that, as mentioned above you probably need to decide what you want to image first and than take it from there. This will then give you more information on which mount (very important for AP)/scope/camera combination would work and wether you can reuse your existing gear or consider something else entirely.

[Some Dude With A Mak- Cass]

9 hours ago, Philip R said:

Aloha Some Dude With A Mak- Cass and welcome to SGL. 

Q1. Are you looking at a DSLR or a dedicated camera?

Q2. How is your Sky Prodigy mounted? - ie Alt-Az, EQ...

Remember that catodioptric 'scopes have pros & cons. The pros are that they are lunar and planet killers for visual and short exposure photos. Also they require virtually no collimation. The cons are the focal ratios are nearing double figures. my ETX 105 is f14 and C6 is f10... also they have a narrow field of view. If yours is the same as the ones that I have just been looking at, then it is on an Alt-Az mount. This may/will cause star trails on long exposures, so you may at some point have to upgrade to an EQ mount which adds to the initial outlay and above your US$400 budget. It will also need to be polar aligned.

As for a DSLR many SGL'ers are using Canon models and some are Nikon or other. Canon used to be the benchmark, but Nikon and the others are catching up. Other SGL'ers will be along to offer their opinions.

If you decide/want to go for deep sky objects, then you may wish to consider a wide-field refractor...such as an ST80 (or clone) and an EQ mount eg EQ5 (or clone) and above.

Hope this helps.

to answer your two questions, i want a dedicated camera, i have a good camera that i use for other stuff, but its no good for astrophotography due to optical issues with the camera- the focus is messed up, it can't focus on something thats not right in front of it.

as for the mount, I'm somewhat new to astronomy, so i went with an alt-az mount for ease of use. i wanted the EQ for the tracking, but the goto system does that anyway so the alt-az made more sense.

I'm planning on mostly deep sky objects when i start, but i would LOVE some good pics of the rings of saturn, cloud bands and moons of jupiter, whatever i can get in the eyepiece really. but after some practice with solar system stuff, ill be in the brighter messier objects mostly, they make for cooler photos in my opinion. also, i know that at some point an EQ mount is simply going to happen, so i am prepared to buy one once i get good enough with astrophotography to make it worth the money. i have up to $1000 a year i can spend on anything my school program allows, and they bought my scope so thats $1000 of astronomy money a year, basically. so when the time comes for an EQ i can pay for it, no problem. thanks for all the help!

[RT65CB-SWL]

2 hours ago, Some Dude With A Mak- Cass said:

to answer your two questions, i want a dedicated camera, i have a good camera that i use for other stuff, but its no good for astrophotography due to optical issues with the camera- the focus is messed up, it can't focus on something thats not right in front of it.

as for the mount, I'm somewhat new to astronomy, so i went with an alt-az mount for ease of use. i wanted the EQ for the tracking, but the goto system does that anyway so the alt-az made more sense.

I'm planning on mostly deep sky objects when i start, but i would LOVE some good pics of the rings of saturn, cloud bands and moons of jupiter, whatever i can get in the eyepiece really. but after some practice with solar system stuff, ill be in the brighter messier objects mostly, they make for cooler photos in my opinion. also, i know that at some point an EQ mount is simply going to happen, so i am prepared to buy one once i get good enough with astrophotography to make it worth the money. i have up to $1000 a year i can spend on anything my school program allows, and they bought my scope so thats $1000 of astronomy money a year, basically. so when the time comes for an EQ i can pay for it, no problem. thanks for all the help!

I see.

Another drawback with an Alt-Az, (apart form what I mentioned about star trails), is the effect known you will encounter is field de-rotation, or is it field rotation, (sorry! been a long day at work). This is where you may not see the effect with the naked-eye at the eyepiece, but the camera sensor will, especially during long exposures of... (let's say thirty seconds). You have to adjust the camera/eyepiece/nosepiece and maybe the balance point of your equipment accordingly to compensate for the Earths rotation as the celestial body crosses the sky. I think you can buy ready made de-rotaters, but you are adding extra expense and extra weight to your budget.

Don't worry, I love Alt-Az mounts too for their simplicity, but at present I am not into astro-photography... yet! 

[Some Dude With A Mak- Cass]

1 hour ago, Philip R said:

I see.

Another drawback with an Alt-Az, (apart form what I mentioned about star trails), is the effect known you will encounter is field de-rotation, or is it field rotation, (sorry! been a long day at work). This is where you may not see the effect with the naked-eye at the eyepiece, but the camera sensor will, especially during long exposures of... (let's say thirty seconds). You have to adjust the camera/eyepiece/nosepiece and maybe the balance point of your equipment accordingly to compensate for the Earths rotation as the celestial body crosses the sky. I think you can buy ready made de-rotaters, but you are adding extra expense and extra weight to your budget.

Don't worry, I love Alt-Az mounts too for their simplicity, but at present I am not into astro-photography... yet! 

thanks, this helps a lot. i guess i should start looking into some affordable de- rotators, if i want to do decent length exposures. planetary exposures are only a few seconds from what i have read, so i can do those well... i guess I'm not in a good situation to do astrophotography yet, so i better look into my options here. price wise, is it smarter to get a second scope for AP or to outfit what i have with the necessary equipment??

[Shibby]

I have to comment - the focus issues that you're having with your DSLR are irrelevant to astrophotography. Your telescope's manual focuser is what you'd be using - not the normal focus control on a lens.

For beginners, I strongly recommend using a DSLR. It'll quickly give you decent results with its generously large sensor and one-shot colour ability.

Your mount and scope are actually bigger barriers to getting started in astrophotography (at least, if it's DSOs you're interested in?) The long focal length, combined with the Alt-Az mount will be a huge challenge in regards to tracking and exposure length. At the very least, change the scope to something like a 130PDS and you should be able to grab 30-second exposures without too many discards.

After that, I would look into acquiring an HEQ5 or similar with motors (I highly recommend checking the second-hand market). You already have the camera to get started!

[happy-kat]

For dso imaging take off the mak and use just your dslr and a camera lens. You mount tracks in tiny left right up down movements and 30 seconds is possible with that mount sometimes longer too depending where in the sky pointing the camera before field rotation becomes too evident.

What camera do you already own?

[Some Dude With A Mak- Cass]

9 hours ago, happy-kat said:

For dso imaging take off the mak and use just your dslr and a camera lens. You mount tracks in tiny left right up down movements and 30 seconds is possible with that mount sometimes longer too depending where in the sky pointing the camera before field rotation becomes too evident.

What camera do you already own?

its a nikon, a nikon DX 18- 55 mm. at least, thats what it says. (i don't really know, i didn't buy it.) id take of the mak, but i have no other way to get magnification. i have no other optical tubes, I'm to new to amateur astronomy to have bought much. even as i write this, i have a bunch of tabs open that i am using to look up definitions of terms i should probably know by now . but this forum has been so helpful, i have learned more by browsing this than i have in almost two years of independent research.. wow!! i have a buttload of questions, most of which i have no answers to. is there any way, any way at all, that i can still use an alt-az mount? i don't care if it will limit me, i just want to know what my options are. also, does anybody know of a way to use a mak for AP despite the issues? and also, what exactly ARE the issues? i feel so stupid right now!! ? at least now i have a way to get answers to these questions... thanks to everybody who has commented and given me tips, its been a TREENDOUS help!!! 

[Gina]

No need to feel stupid, we were all newbies once   Good luck and enjoy.   I will recommend a book on DSO imaging though - "Making Every Photon Count" by Steve Richards and available from FLO (see top of page).  Steve is "steppenwolf" on here   Best £20 I ever spent

[happy-kat]

You can use your mount you just have to work within it's limitations. Take a read of the No EQ DSO Challenge thread.

Whilst you are learning you can do wider star field images with the equipment you have using your camera. The mak adds demands with it being longer focal length so once you have a feel for what you are doing try then with the mak.

What is the model of your Nikon camera? You just shared what lens it uses which is great to capture a stretch of milky way.

[RT65CB-SWL]

On 19/10/2017 at 01:26, Some Dude With A Mak- Cass said:

its a nikon, a nikon DX 18- 55 mm. at least, thats what it says. (i don't really know, i didn't buy it.) id take of the mak, but i have no other way to get magnification. i have no other optical tubes, I'm to new to amateur astronomy to have bought much. even as i write this, i have a bunch of tabs open that i am using to look up definitions of terms i should probably know by now . but this forum has been so helpful, i have learned more by browsing this than i have in almost two years of independent research.. wow!! i have a buttload of questions, most of which i have no answers to. is there any way, any way at all, that i can still use an alt-az mount? i don't care if it will limit me, i just want to know what my options are. also, does anybody know of a way to use a mak for AP despite the issues? and also, what exactly ARE the issues? i feel so stupid right now!! ? at least now i have a way to get answers to these questions... thanks to everybody who has commented and given me tips, its been a TREENDOUS help!!! 

No need to feel stupid. We all started this hobby for some reason or other... in my case an uncle and me being inquisitive.

I personally would start with the Moon and its various phases... and then on to the brighter planets, i.e. Venus, Jupiter & Saturn. Mars is possible too. (see photos below). The 'scopes/OTA's were mounted on my Tele-Optic Giro and the camera was an Olympus C2040 using afocal projection.

 

  

photo 1 - Mars during the last close opposition [April 2014] near LHR as seen with my C6 XLT & TV 6mm Radian e/p + neodymium filter.

 

  

photo 2 - Jupiter as seen with my 'un-modded' ETX105 (with misalingned/collimation issue) & TV 8mm Plossl/no filter, from 51.43N, -0.93W. I cannot remember what date/year... now that is 'stupid'. 

 

 

[happy-kat]

If the images were afocal get the date from the EXIF info.

[RT65CB-SWL]

4 hours ago, happy-kat said:

If the images were afocal get the date from the EXIF info.

I would have done... but the photos I have used in my post are from my SGL photo archive (i.e. where it says 'Insert other media' ---> 'Insert existing attachment') from my other SGL postings... as I can't remember where the CD-ROM is that I saved them on... 'even more stupid'. 

[Some Dude With A Mak- Cass]

12 hours ago, happy-kat said:

You can use your mount you just have to work within it's limitations. Take a read of the No EQ DSO Challenge thread.

Whilst you are learning you can do wider star field images with the equipment you have using your camera. The mak adds demands with it being longer focal length so once you have a feel for what you are doing try then with the mak.

What is the model of your Nikon camera? You just shared what lens it uses which is great to capture a stretch of milky way.

in short, i don't know. i didn't buy it and i looked for the manual, can't find it anywhere. thanks for recommending that thread- i read it and its been very helpful. 

[Davey-T]

28 minutes ago, Some Dude With A Mak- Cass said:

in short, i don't know. i didn't buy it and i looked for the manual, can't find it anywhere. thanks for recommending that thread- i read it and its been very helpful. 

Have a browse of this and see if you recognise it, may even find a review.

Dave

https://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/cameras?subcategoryId=cameras

[Some Dude With A Mak- Cass]

23 hours ago, Davey-T said:

Have a browse of this and see if you recognise it, may even find a review.

Dave

https://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/cameras?subcategoryId=cameras

found it!! it says which brand it it right on the front, and i somehow didn't see it despite looking at LEAST 5 times... its a nikon d60, 10 megapixels.

[PembrokeSteve]

I would go for the best you can afford - the ZWO ASI178MC (non cool version) could be a good choice. At this moment "I have my eye on getting this camera for myself VERY soon". It is appears to be very good on Deep Sky as well as Planetary, and has "excellent all round performance" (see some of the u-tube videos that are on the net).  One thing is for certain, is that as soon  you get familiar to a piece of kit (ie) whatever Astro Camera you buy, you will SOON crave for something better. 
Regards,
Steve

[ollypenrice]

On 17/10/2017 at 08:05, ronin said:

Are you considering colour or mono ? Mono needs a filter wheel and filters and they like everything cost. Colour doesn't give as good a final result but they do not take as long to get the data/image as they collect everything in one go, hence the term OSC = One Shot Camera. 

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this point to Ronin but he is totally incorrect. An OSC camera DOES NOT COLLECT EVERYTHING IN ONE GO. It collects about ONE THIRD OF THE INCIDENT LIGHT and distributes this one-third efficient collection on the basis of 50% green and 25% red and blue which is not a very sensible distribution in astrophotography, though it makes good sense in terrestrial use.

The nearest we can get to 'collecting everythng in one go' is shooting luminance in a monochrome camera. When we do this we collect red and green and blue light (the entire visible spectrum) simultaneously but we are not able to distinguish between them. In truth it is simply impossible with present technology to 'collect everything in one go.' We can collect all the light (luminance) OR we can use colour filters to distinguish colours. The reason why monochrome is faster than OSC is that, in the same total exposure time, SOME of that time is spent capturing ALL THE COLOURS at once.

I don't want to come across as bashing one shot colour. I've owned and used two and am seriously considering sinking £4K in a new one, but we need to understand that they are not faster than monochrome cameras, they are slower.

Olly

[pete_l]

19 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

An OSC camera DOES NOT COLLECT EVERYTHING IN ONE GO. It collects about ONE THIRD OF THE INCIDENT LIGHT and distributes this one-third efficient collection on the basis of 50% green and 25% red and blue which is not a very sensible distribution in astrophotography, though it makes good sense in terrestrial use.

I think it's pretty clear that Ronin is saying that a single action (or "shot") with a OSC collects all the data necessary for an image.

Yes, it doesn't get as good an image as a mono CCD and set of filters, but there is obviously a trade-off between simplicity and quality that many, many, people are willing to make. The point to remember if that this is a hobby, not a competition. We are trying to do work that pleases us, with the time, experience and equipment (and money) available.

And there is no reason why a person who starts with a DSLR or OSC has to stay with that equipment for ever. But those sorts of cameras do make the barrier to entry into photography a little easier to overcome.

[ollypenrice]

20 minutes ago, pete_l said:

I think it's pretty clear that Ronin is saying that a single action (or "shot") with a OSC collects all the data necessary for an image.

Yes, it doesn't get as good an image as a mono CCD and set of filters, but there is obviously a trade-off between simplicity and quality that many, many, people are willing to make. The point to remember if that this is a hobby, not a competition. We are trying to do work that pleases us, with the time, experience and equipment (and money) available.

And there is no reason why a person who starts with a DSLR or OSC has to stay with that equipment for ever. But those sorts of cameras do make the barrier to entry into photography a little easier to overcome.

I don't think that it is clear that this is what Ronin is saying. He states repeatedly that it is faster to use OSC than mono and this is simply incorrect. If I come across as slightly exasperated it is because Ronin has never ever responded to my argument that L = R+G+B = 3 units of light per pixel, while R or G or B (or OSC ) = 1 unit of light per pixel. Not to mention the astronomically eccentric idea of shooting 2 x green. So in LRGB imaging you have one session of 3 units of light and three of 1 unit of light, making 6 units of light. In OSC you have four sessions capturing 1 unit of light making 4 units of light. (in the wrong colour balance.) 

The more light you have, the easier it is to make a good image in post processing. It is, therefore, quite wrong to suggest that OSC is easier. I'm quite experienced in imaging and have spent hundreds of hours processing OSC data from my Atik OSC cameras. Honestly, honestly, I did not find it easier to process. More light = easier and better.

If this is incorrect, please explain. But the best OSC imagers in the world say exactly the same thing.

Olly

 

[Gina]

Of course, Olly is right.  I too have used both OSC and mono cameras and know that from my own experience.  However, there are several DSOs that make pretty good images with an OSC such as a DSLR.  I started with a DSLR for deep sky imaging (for planetary my first camera was a webcam and I was thrilled to capture the rings of Saturn )  and I think I captured some quite respectable images which satisfied me at the time.  And I think that is the point - the images satisfied me.  I have built on my astro equipment over the years and spent far too much money for the amount of use it gets but that's what happens when bitten by the bug

I think the most important item of equipment is an EQ mount that will track the sky.  But even without that you can do astro imaging.  You don't need a telescope either - the camera lens is capable of taking some quite interesting wide field views.  A fast lens helps.  You can start astro imaging with quite simple equipment and see if you like it.

[Some Dude With A Mak- Cass]

On 10/20/2017 at 19:15, PembrokeSteve said:

I would go for the best you can afford - the ZWO ASI178MC (non cool version) could be a good choice. At this moment "I have my eye on getting this camera for myself VERY soon". It is appears to be very good on Deep Sky as well as Planetary, and has "excellent all round performance" (see some of the u-tube videos that are on the net).  One thing is for certain, is that as soon  you get familiar to a piece of kit (ie) whatever Astro Camera you buy, you will SOON crave for something better. 
Regards,
Steve

this is exactly the kind go help i need!! ill take a look at it, it sounds like exactly what i want. thank you!

 

2 hours ago, Gina said:

Of course, Olly is right.  I too have used both OSC and mono cameras and know that from my own experience.  However, there are several DSOs that make pretty good images with an OSC such as a DSLR.  I started with a DSLR for deep sky imaging (for planetary my first camera was a webcam and I was thrilled to capture the rings of Saturn )  and I think I captured some quite respectable images which satisfied me at the time.  And I think that is the point - the images satisfied me.  I have built on my astro equipment over the years and spent far too much money for the amount of use it gets but that's what happens when bitten by the bug

I think the most important item of equipment is an EQ mount that will track the sky.  But even without that you can do astro imaging.  You don't need a telescope either - the camera lens is capable of taking some quite interesting wide field views.  A fast lens helps.  You can start astro imaging with quite simple equipment and see if you like it.

thanks gina. i have been hoping to do this for a looong time, and hearing you say that makes it seem more realistic. a wide field view will be an awesome pic to take, and i can't wait for that first pic of saturn or jupiter.. its gonna be great.

[ollypenrice]

Because the OSC/RGB speed question comes up so often I've made a simple graph to show the 6 to 4 minimum speed advantage of the LRGB system over the OSC. Time is constant in both cases. An OSC camera has a single colour filter over every pixel, usually 2xG, 1xB and 1xR. The vertical* lines represent the filters. The horizontal lines represent the incoming beam of full spectrum light and the same beam after arriving at the filter. The luminance filter passes all three colours.

If we think of each horizontal line as a unit of light we see that more of them reach the chip in LRGB than in OSC and in a better proprtion for astronomy.

However, please don't take this as an attack on OSC. There is a lot to be said for OSC, especially under frustrating skies.  The only point I want to make is that, contrary to poplular belief, they do not confer a speed advantage at capture.

Olly

* Well, they were meant to be vertical!